Jump to content


Photo

WB+MO or WB alone?


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 mtar925

mtar925

    Citizen

  • Citizen
  • 22 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 11:18 AM

Hi! New to modding Skyrim though I used WB for Oblivion a few years ago. I had great success with WB 295.5 which I think was the last version put out by the original developer(s). When I "upgraded" to 302.x and 303.x I started having problems with incomprehensible (to me) error messages and an unstable game. Not sure if it was really due to WB or other factors. Has the new team got it really sorted out with the current WB release for Skyrim? I see Mod Organizer is an option now, too, and someone suggested using a combination of MO for modding and WB only to create the bashed patch. Is that because of ease of use for those new to modding? I got fairly comfortable with BAIN installs back in the Oblivion days and would rather stick with one mod manager, unless MO really adds some functionality. Thanks! Matt
  • 0

#2 deathneko11

deathneko11

    Southern Otaku

  • Mod Author
  • Pip
  • 376 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:23 PM

I would firmly suggest just playing around with the features that MO provides and see if you would be comfortable using it. In many ways the features are similar to WryeBash's but there are also features that MO provides that WryeBash does not, and some of these features that are unique to MO make for a rich modding experience when used in conjunction with WB for bashed patches. If you want to see some of what MO can do, try looking at my video tutorials which you can find in my signature. The Beginner's Guide and Advanced Guide are a little out of date and do not show the most recent additions to MO but still suitable for getting it set up and getting the most out of MO in regard to installing and organizing mods.
  • 0

#3 mtar925

mtar925

    Citizen

  • Citizen
  • 22 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:46 PM

Thanks I'll check 'em out.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users